[MV72018]

I am pleased that Tara took the time, and the Chronicle took the initiative, to analyze what went wrong last year.  Keeping in mind that Tara NEVER talks about X's and O's to the press--and is obsessive about not giving insight into strategy, tactics, or health--I found her comments persuasive and confirmatory with what I saw.  She is willing to talk about team chemistry, and clearly that was defective last year.  The reasons for why are--as Tara says--complex.  Tara knows she is responsible and has taken some initiatives to address the issue.  Whether she (or anyone) can succeed in restoring team cohesion in the era of "market-yourself-and-make-bucks" remains to be seen.

As for comparisons with other players and other teams--there is no other team remotely like Stanford.  There is no other contending team with the academic pressures in both recruiting and  during the fours years that Stanford has.   How NIL and the revolving door of transfers interface with an intense commitment to academics on top of the intense commitment to basketball has to be worked out as a unique Stanford solution.  I doubt we are there yet, if there ever can be a solution for us.  But Mississippi, LSU, even UCLA are nothing like Stanford, and their solutions will be different from our solutions.  Perhaps the deck from now on is just going to be stacked against us.

As for everything else, such as our inability to score against tough defenses, she has no comment, and never has had a comment about similar issues.  Unrealistic to expect that kind of insight from her after 40 years of playing it close to the vest.  Not that I wouldn't love to hear that kind of basketball detail from her.

Color me dubious about how efficacious one of the steps she reportedly took -- buying a book for team members to read -- will prove to be  As for playing it close to the vest, I'm not impressed. That seems to me like an excuse for laziness and unwillingness to identify clearly what the problems were. From where I sit 81alum, an excellent basketball analyst, is too generous in giving Tara free passes for her unproductive habits. 81alum simply says that it was "unrealistic to expect" Tara to change her uncommunicativeness about the causes of the team's end-of-season collapse. Why not say candidly that it is "unreasonable not to change" that propensity when it has proven unfruitful? One last thing, I didn't find much specificity in the Chronicle article. Full of vague and elusive claims.

[MV72018]

I am pleased that Tara took the time, and the Chronicle took the initiative, to analyze what went wrong last year.  Keeping in mind that Tara NEVER talks about X's and O's to the press--and is obsessive about not giving insight into strategy, tactics, or health--I found her comments persuasive and confirmatory with what I saw.  She is willing to talk about team chemistry, and clearly that was defective last year.  The reasons for why are--as Tara says--complex.  Tara knows she is responsible and has taken some initiatives to address the issue.  Whether she (or anyone) can succeed in restoring team cohesion in the era of "market-yourself-and-make-bucks" remains to be seen.

As for comparisons with other players and other teams--there is no other team remotely like Stanford.  There is no other contending team with the academic pressures in both recruiting and  during the fours years that Stanford has.   How NIL and the revolving door of transfers interface with an intense commitment to academics on top of the intense commitment to basketball has to be worked out as a unique Stanford solution.  I doubt we are there yet, if there ever can be a solution for us.  But Mississippi, LSU, even UCLA are nothing like Stanford, and their solutions will be different from our solutions.  Perhaps the deck from now on is just going to be stacked against us.

As for everything else, such as our inability to score against tough defenses, she has no comment, and never has had a comment about similar issues.  Unrealistic to expect that kind of insight from her after 40 years of playing it close to the vest.  Not that I wouldn't love to hear that kind of basketball detail from her.

Color me dubious about how efficacious one of the steps she reportedly took -- buying a book for team members to read -- will prove to be  As for playing it close to the vest, I'm not impressed. That seems to me like an excuse for laziness and unwillingness to identify clearly what the problems were. From where I sit 81alum, an excellent basketball analyst, is too generous in giving Tara free passes for her unproductive habits. 81alum simply says that it was "unrealistic to expect" Tara to change her uncommunicativeness about the causes of the team's end-of-season collapse. Why not say candidly that it is "unreasonable not to change" that propensity when it has proven unfruitful? One last thing, I didn't find much specificity in the Chronicle article. Full of vague and elusive claims.